liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Do read the rules prior to hitting send.
I have read the rules long ago. I read them again just to make sure that you are brain- damaged.
Why have you never made any reference to them esp when directed to specifics in them scores of times?[/quote]
So; why have you never made any reference to them?
liar soorer wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
I have read the rules long ago. I read them again just to make sure that you are brain- damaged.
Why have you never made any reference to them esp when directed to specifics in them scores of times?
So; why have you never made any reference to them?[/quote]
A prize for who can work out which poster said the bladder is part the digestive system and it is via the digestive system we detect banned metabolites.
Now who on earth could that be?
A prize for the poster who can work out which poster is doing everything he can conceive of to deny the finding that Houlihan is a doper.
Armstronglivs wrote:
A prize for the poster who can work out which poster is doing everything he can conceive of to deny the finding that Houlihan is a doper.
There was no finding that she was a doper.Read rule 10.
But finding that a poster is still hunting up his rectum in the hope of finding his bladder and kidneys is still a good game.
Armstronglivs wrote:
z5zg4 wrote:
My comment was a test - which you both failed - and for the same reason. You didn't get the point about the limitations imposed by a difference of more than two standard deviations - and by your inability to grasp that you established its existence here. The baboon comment was a red herring. The sting to your lack of intelligence had already been delivered.
It was not a "test". Liar.
Probably you still havn't got it that your baboon-insult wasn't "unfair" to a baboon at all.
You have not understand, you will not understand and if you will understand (which would be a big surprise), you will not admit to it.
Barking sounds.[/quote]
How old are you?
z5zg4 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
It was not a "test". Liar.
Probably you still havn't got it that your baboon-insult wasn't "unfair" to a baboon at all.
You have not understand, you will not understand and if you will understand (which would be a big surprise), you will not admit to it.
Barking sounds.
How old are you?[/quote]
You want to know who else shares your mental age?
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
A prize for the poster who can work out which poster is doing everything he can conceive of to deny the finding that Houlihan is a doper.
There was no finding that she was a doper.Read rule 10.
But finding that a poster is still hunting up his rectum in the hope of finding his bladder and kidneys is still a good game.
A better game is finding nandrolone in a top runner. Anti-doping wins. Winning isn't something you would have experienced, particularly when you are that far up your own rectum.
liar soorer wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
I have read the rules long ago. I read them again just to make sure that you are brain- damaged.
Why have you never made any reference to them esp when directed to specifics in them scores of times?
So; why have you never made any reference to them?[/quote]
On the contrary, it's the rules that delivered the right result in the Houlihan case. You must be delighted.
I only pray that the complete works of armstronglivs on letsrun will one day be available all in a box set. i am much inspired to spend so long saying so little before i die.
filthy ani wrote:
I only pray that the complete works of armstronglivs on letsrun will one day be available all in a box set. i am much inspired to spend so long saying so little before i die.
I am sure you are doing it already, every day.
Armstronglivs wrote:
z5zg4 wrote:
Barking sounds.
How old are you?
You want to know who else shares your mental age?[/quote]
Which intention you've had at all with your childish comment, it not even makes any sense.
But I know you will give further evidence soon, that you can't think logically.
z5zg4 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
How old are you?
You want to know who else shares your mental age?
Which intention you've had at all with your childish comment, it not even makes any sense.
But I know you will give further evidence soon, that you can't think logically.[/quote]
You should be pleased he has not made a reference to you being human bodily waste product.
He should be banned.
I
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Why have you never made any reference to them esp when directed to specifics in them scores of times?
So; why have you never made any reference to them?
On the contrary, it's the rules that delivered the right result in the Houlihan case. You must be delighted.[/quote]
Logical contradiction.
As well as again refusing to ref the rules.
liar soorer wrote:
z5zg4 wrote:
You want to know who else shares your mental age?
Which intention you've had at all with your childish comment, it not even makes any sense.
But I know you will give further evidence soon, that you can't think logically.
You should be pleased he has not made a reference to you being human bodily waste product.
He should be banned.[/quote]
That accolade is reserved for you.
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Which intention you've had at all with your childish comment, it not even makes any sense.
But I know you will give further evidence soon, that you can't think logically.
You should be pleased he has not made a reference to you being human bodily waste product.
He should be banned.
That accolade is reserved for you.[/quote]
You should be banned for 100’s of vile abusive insults.
z5zg4 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
How old are you?
You want to know who else shares your mental age?
Which intention you've had at all with your childish comment, it not even makes any sense.
But I know you will give further evidence soon, that you can't think logically.[/quote]
Logic suggests to me that you are loser out of your depth. But since you say I can't think logically I have relied upon you to prove it. Well done.
Armstronglivs wrote:
z5zg4 wrote:
You want to know who else shares your mental age?
Which intention you've had at all with your childish comment, it not even makes any sense.
But I know you will give further evidence soon, that you can't think logically.
Logic suggests to me that you are loser out of your depth. But since you say I can't think logically I have relied upon you to prove it. Well done.[/quote]
Can anyone detect a molecule of sense in the above?
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You should be pleased he has not made a reference to you being human bodily waste product.
He should be banned.
That accolade is reserved for you.
You should be banned for 100’s of vile abusive insults.[/quote]
But if I were banned you might never learn the truth about yourself.
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You should be pleased he has not made a reference to you being human bodily waste product.
He should be banned.
That accolade is reserved for you.
You should be banned for 100’s of vile abusive insults.[/quote]
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Which intention you've had at all with your childish comment, it not even makes any sense.
But I know you will give further evidence soon, that you can't think logically.
Logic suggests to me that you are loser out of your depth. But since you say I can't think logically I have relied upon you to prove it. Well done.
Can anyone detect a molecule of sense in the above?[/quote]
A molecule is asking a bit much of you.